Avast 5.1.864/874 P2p & Utorrent

[bikemanAMD]

Wondering if it's ok with the updated Avast 5.1 versions to recheck in P2p Shield utorrent to scan the items i sometimes use with that program

Thank you All

[DavidR]

I don't think that option has anything to do with avast, but rather the way that uTorrent works. It is by splitting a download into lots of little individual files before cobbling them all together which causes lots of avast scan activity.

It is this which can cause the adverse system performance rather than any particular issue with 5.1.864 and 5.1.874 (pre-release). This uTorrent P2P being unchecked by default in the P2P Shield goes back to avast 5.0 and possible avast 4.8.

So it rather depends on your system spec and performance if how utorrent works will have a drag on your system performance if you enable it in the P2P Shield settings.

[Lisandro]

I think that nothing changed in the situation of utorrent in latests versions, i.e., the utorrent program open/saves the files too frequently that the scanning brings problems (high CPU usage).

[Dch48]

My machine is far from top end and I always have uTorrent checked in Avast! without a single problem. No slowdowns at all. What happens with bit torrent downloads is that they are broken into many small pieces and Avast! does not scan anything until a piece is completed .Then it scans that piece and only that piece and it's almost instantaneous. Even it it did impact performance, you should always have the scanning enabled as many things obtained through bit torrent clients are hacked and contain malware.

The sad thing is that the bit Torrent system is supposed to provide faster downloading but in reality it doesn't. If you can find a direct download source for the same file, it's always faster than getting it through bit torrent. This is probably a big reason why the technology is almost exclusively used for things you can't get any other way.

[Para-Noid]

I don't think that option has anything to do with avast, but rather the way that uTorrent works. It is by splitting a download into lots of little individual files before cobbling them all together which causes lots of avast scan activity.

It is this which can cause the adverse system performance rather than any particular issue with 5.1.864 and 5.1.874 (pre-release). This uTorrent P2P being unchecked by default in the P2P Shield goes back to avast 5.0 and possible avast 4.8.

So it rather depends on your system spec and performance if how utorrent works will have a drag on your system performance if you enable it in the P2P Shield settings.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I thought by using utorrent and/or bit torrent the small packets could contain malware, spyware or worse yet viruses. And even though in small packets they could release their nasty things before the download is complete.

[DavidR]

I rather doubt any malware can be activated in a packet/partial download as a) there is no way anything could execute the partial/packet download and b) how would they know which packet contained the malware element to be able to run it even if it could be run.

Malware is usually incorporated into the completed modified installation file, so when that is run it install not only what it was you thought you downloaded but also the uninvited guest.

[Dch48]

The malware in a file broken up by bit torrent is always located in the first piece. (which is rarely the first piece that is downloaded. The pieces are chosen at random and by availability). When that piece is scanned, the malware is detected before it ever gets a chance to try to execute in the full file. If that piece is quarantined or deleted, the full file will not even run. Actually the download will usually be halted at that point and never finish in the first place. Believe me, I know this is how it works from personal experience

[Nesivos]

I think that nothing changed in the situation of utorrent in latests versions, i.e., the utorrent program open/saves the files too frequently that the scanning brings problems (high CPU usage).

I use utorrent and have never noticed any degradation of performance while I am using it, but that is just me

[Para-Noid]

Thanks DavidR and Dch48. I always wondered about that. I just never remember at the right time. My rmemberer ain't what it used to be.